Jesus' Prayer, John 17

December 2, 2003

Contrary to those who have misused it, Jesus' prayer in the chapter following
our text that "they all may be one" has nothing to do with visible structural
unity or uniformity. His prayer reads "That they may all be one; even as thou,
Father, art in me, and I in thee...." Now, where is the structural visibility in
that oneness of Father and Son that should model the oneness among believers?
But even if we have misread that prayer, there are twenty-six other pieces in
the New Testament which yield a different view. In Mark's Gospel, a disciple
says to Jesus, "Teacher, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we
forbade him, because he was not following us." And Jesus said, "do not forbid
him...he that is not against us is for us." So much for marching in step.

In Romans 13 and 14 Paul allows for diversity in everything but love for the
neighbor, thundering at the champions of uniformity in matters of diet and
worship: "who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before
his own master that he stands or falls!" So much for uniformity.

In Second Timothy the author writes: "I permit no woman to teach or to have
authority over men; she is to keep silent"--in direct contradiction of the
apostle who writes that when she preaches a woman must cover her head. So much
for visible unity.

Just as the word "God" in the Old Testament is the center of gravity for a
host of narratives, prophecies, laws, and hymns that resist reducing to a common
denominator, so the word "Christ" in the New. The one Christ, the one Savior,
the one Lord, viewed in ways that are not interchangeable. These differences in
perspective regarding the one Christ are not, nor were they ever the scandal of
Christianity; they result from the New Testament itself.

In the second century lived a Syrian Christian who tried to conflate the four
Gospels into one. The ancient church stubbornly resisted his attempt and swore
that just as there were four corners of the earth or four winds, so there must
be four Gospels. What remains of Tatian the Syrian's enterprise is a fragment in
a tongue not his own. Now, if our confessions make this clear, if they enunciate
the biblical view of the one Christ viewed from various perspectives, so that a
Matthew can never be a stand-in for a Mark, Luke, John, or Paul, well and good.

But we are not confessionalists. If we have read our confessions wrongly--as
some responsible for our tribulation never cease telling us--infinitely less
harm will be done than if we have misread what Scripture has said, what Christ
has said. The aim and purpose of the confessions is to serve Christ and his
word. If they do not, they are to submit to it--as they themselves concede.